Since C++11, the C++ standard has a forward progress guarantee
[intro.progress], so all such functions must have the `mustprogress`
requirement. In addition, from C11 and onwards, loops without a non-zero
constant conditional or no conditional are also required to make
progress (C11 6.8.5p6). This patch implements these attribute deductions
so they can be used by the optimization passes.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86841
Let's try this again; this has been reverted/recommited a few times. Last time
this got reverted because for this loop:
void a() {
#pragma clang loop vectorize(disable)
for (;;)
;
}
vectorisation was incorrectly enabled and the vectorize.enable metadata was set
due to a logic error. But with this fixed, we now imply vectorisation when:
1) vectorisation is enabled, which means: VectorizeWidth > 1,
2) and don't want to add it when it is disabled or enabled, otherwise we would
be incorrectly setting it or duplicating the metadata, respectively.
This should fix PR27643.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69628
This reverts commit 80371c74ae.
Given the following source:
```
void a() {
for (;;)
;
}
```
It incorrectly enables vectorization (with vector width 1), as well as generating a warning that vectorization could not be performed.
This was further discussed at the llvm dev list:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-October/135602.html
I think the brief summary of that is that this change is an improvement,
this is the behaviour that we expect and promise in ours docs, and also
as a result there are cases where we now emit diagnostics whereas before
pragmas were silently ignored. Two areas where we can improve: 1) the
diagnostic message itself, and 2) and in some cases (e.g. -Os and -Oz)
the vectoriser is (quite understandably) not triggering.
Original commit message:
Specifying the vectorization width was supposed to implicitly enable
vectorization, except that it wasn't really doing this. It was only
setting the vectorize.width metadata, but not vectorize.enable.
This should fix PR27643.
llvm-svn: 374288
This broke the Chromium build. Consider the following code:
float ScaleSumSamples_C(const float* src, float* dst, float scale, int width) {
float fsum = 0.f;
int i;
#if defined(__clang__)
#pragma clang loop vectorize_width(4)
#endif
for (i = 0; i < width; ++i) {
float v = *src++;
fsum += v * v;
*dst++ = v * scale;
}
return fsum;
}
Compiling at -Oz, Clang now warns:
$ clang++ -target x86_64 -Oz -c /tmp/a.cc
/tmp/a.cc:1:7: warning: loop not vectorized: the optimizer was unable to
perform the requested transformation; the transformation might be disabled or
specified as part of an unsupported transformation ordering
[-Wpass-failed=transform-warning]
this suggests it's not actually enabling vectorization hard enough.
At -Os it asserts instead:
$ build.release/bin/clang++ -target x86_64 -Os -c /tmp/a.cc
clang-10: /work/llvm.monorepo/llvm/lib/Transforms/Vectorize/LoopVectorize.cpp:2734: void
llvm::InnerLoopVectorizer::emitMemRuntimeChecks(llvm::Loop*, llvm::BasicBlock*): Assertion `
!BB->getParent()->hasOptSize() && "Cannot emit memory checks when optimizing for size"' failed.
Of course neither of these are what the developer expected from the pragma.
> Specifying the vectorization width was supposed to implicitly enable
> vectorization, except that it wasn't really doing this. It was only
> setting the vectorize.width metadata, but not vectorize.enable.
>
> This should fix PR27643.
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66290
llvm-svn: 372225
Specifying the vectorization width was supposed to implicitly enable
vectorization, except that it wasn't really doing this. It was only
setting the vectorize.width metadata, but not vectorize.enable.
This should fix PR27643.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66290
llvm-svn: 372082
Before this patch, CGLoop would dump all transformations for a loop into
a single LoopID without encoding any order in which to apply them.
rL348944 added the possibility to encode a transformation order using
followup-attributes.
When a loop has more than one transformation, use the follow-up
attribute define the order in which they are applied. The emitted order
is the defacto order as defined by the current LLVM pass pipeline,
which is:
LoopFullUnrollPass
LoopDistributePass
LoopVectorizePass
LoopUnrollAndJamPass
LoopUnrollPass
MachinePipeliner
This patch should therefore not change the assembly output, assuming
that all explicit transformations can be applied, and no implicit
transformations in-between. In the former case,
WarnMissedTransformationsPass should emit a warning (except for
MachinePipeliner which is not implemented yet). The latter could be
avoided by adding 'llvm.loop.disable_nonforced' attributes.
Because LoopUnrollAndJamPass processes a loop nest, generation of the
MDNode is delayed to after the inner loop metadata have been processed.
A temporary LoopID is therefore used to annotate instructions and
RAUW'ed by the actual LoopID later.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57978
llvm-svn: 357415
Summary:
This is similar to other loop pragmas like 'vectorize'. Currently it
only has state values: distribute(enable) and distribute(disable). When
one of these is specified the corresponding loop metadata is generated:
!{!"llvm.loop.distribute.enable", i1 true/false}
As a result, loop distribution will be attempted on the loop even if
Loop Distribution in not enabled globally. Analogously, with 'disable'
distribution can be turned off for an individual loop even when the pass
is otherwise enabled.
There are some slight differences compared to the existing loop pragmas.
1. There is no 'assume_safety' variant which makes its handling slightly
different from 'vectorize'/'interleave'.
2. Unlike the existing loop pragmas, it does not have a corresponding
numeric pragma like 'vectorize' -> 'vectorize_width'. So for the
consistency checks in CheckForIncompatibleAttributes we don't need to
check it against other pragmas. We just need to check for duplicates of
the same pragma.
Reviewers: rsmith, dexonsmith, aaron.ballman
Subscribers: bob.wilson, cfe-commits, hfinkel
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19403
llvm-svn: 272656
When ‘#pragma clang loop vectorize(assume_safety)’ was specified on a loop other loop hints were lost. The problem is that CGLoopInfo attaches metadata differently than EmitCondBrHints in CGStmt. For do-loops CGLoopInfo attaches metadata to the br in the body block and for while and for loops, the inc block. EmitCondBrHints on the other hand always attaches data to the br in the cond block. When specifying assume_safety CGLoopInfo emits an empty llvm.loop metadata shadowing the metadata in the cond block. Loop transformations like rotate and unswitch would then eliminate the cond block and its non-empty metadata.
This patch unifies both approaches for adding metadata and modifies the existing safety tests to include non-assume_safety loop hints.
llvm-svn: 243315
Atmn Patel